2018 Ballot Measures: Amendments and Propositions

What is the difference between an AMENDMENT and a PROPOSITION?

An AMENDMENT amends the Colorado Constitution

while

a PROPOSITION changes Colorado State Statutes.

IndivisibleNOCO believes it is important to understand ballot initiatives, who is for the initiatives, and who is against the initiatives. It is also important to understand why
groups or individuals are for or against the initiatives. We found that, for the most part, the Colorado Assembly "Blue Book Analysis" was a great source of information for
understanding the initiatives. Several of the more controversial initiatives required a bit more background research.

Please follow the links below for summaries of the initiatives, detailed analyses by the Colorado Assembly and other groups and additional research done by IndivisibleNOCO. Taking the time
to understand the initiatives will broaden your understanding of general Colorado law and some of the issues that are front and center in Colorado, such as school funding and oil and gas
industry setbacks.

Amendment V: Lower the age requirement for service in Colorado Legislature from
25 to 21

IndivisibleNOCO is voting YES

IndivisibleNOCO sees no reason why someone who can vote and serve in the military should not be able to serve in the Colorado Legislature. We have seen incredible leadership from our
Country's younger citizens and believe this amendment will encourage more civic participation.

This amendment simplifies the ballot and reduces the use of paper. We question whether voters will be confused by the change, which is the argument against the amendment. They
may be initially confused by the change but we trust that they will adapt quickly.

Amendment X: Use Federal definition of "industrial hemp" in the CO Constitution

IndivisibleNOCO is voting YES

The proposed change in language is minor and consistency in definitions will facilitate compliance with federal policy and help hemp growers remain competitive with other states.

IIndivisibleNOCO has spent time researching these amendments and the motivation behind them. Both amendments are the result of parties with different political views and agenda coming
together to develop an independent process for redistricting for Federal representation (Amendment Y) and State representation (Amendment Z). We have concerns about the process, including
its feasibility and complexity, but believe there are enough checks and balances in the amendments to ensure that districts are drawn in a fair and logical fashion.

Amendment A: Remove from the CO Constitution language allowing slavery and
involuntary servitude to be used as punishment for the conviction of a crime

IndivisibleNOCO is voting YES

IndivisibleNOCO agrees that removing the language reflects Colorado’s commitment to equality and just treatment. Removal of this language is long past due.

Colorado's education system has been greatly damaged by the TABOR and Gallagher amendments. This amendment is a step toward refunding public schools and rebuilding our lost
reputation. Everyone in the state benefits from a good public education system. The increases in taxes are relatively small and the impacted population is relatively small. Yes,
our economy is prospering, but history shows that it will not continue to attract business who look to invest in states with an strong education system.

Amendment 74: Compensation for Reduction in Fair Market Value by Government Law or
Regulation

IndivisibleNOCO is voting NO

This amendment, which is modeled after ALEC legislation, is being pushed by the oil and gas industry in response to Proposition 112. Amendment 74 would have a devastating impact on the
ability of Colorado's government institutions to govern and could potentially cost the taxpayers millions, if not billions of dollars.

IndivisibleNOCO believes that campaign finance reform is needed. However, we are skeptical of this approach since it appears that to opens the door further to PAC money pouring into our
elections. Further, at this time we cannot find any evidence that an analytical approach was taken to conclude that this measure would be the best, or even a reasonable, solution to our
campaign finance issues.

IndivisibleNOCO is voting “yes” on this measure. Colorado must invest in transportation infrastructure, which
includes highways and roads, bike paths, sidewalks, and public transit, such as buses, rail, and rides for the elderly and disabled. State sales taxes in Colorado are among the lowest in the
nation, which contributes to our continuing challenges of investing in transportation infrastructure. We need to pay if we want to improve our quality of life. The sales and use tax
excludes basic needs, so there is not an undue burden on lower income households. Proposition 110, unlike Proposition 109, provides some local control over use of the funds. Finally,
and perhaps most importantly, Proposition 110 funds transportation infrastructure without robbing funds from other important state expenditures, including education and health care.

We found evidence that payday loans do more harm than good and that those most affected are the poor and those with low financial illiteracy. Because of the negative impact of these
loans on job performance and retention and military readiness he Military Lending Act of 2006 limits the total cost for a payday loan to military personnel and their families to a 36% APR, which
is what this proposition proposes.

We think that the 2,500' setback specified in this proposition should be a minimum. It's consistent with research that shows the negative health and economic impacts of living within 2,600'
of oil and gas operations. Public safety officials set a 2,500' perimeter when responding to oil and gas site incidents. This proposition gives local citizens and governments more control
over what happens in their municipalities (and counties). The oil and gas industry is spending millions of dollars (almost $10m at the last count) to fight this Proposition, including to
hire people to harass people collecting signatures to get the proposition on the ballot. We do need the oil and gas industry, but let's make sure it is not at the expense of our residents'
well-being.